On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 13:41:33 +0100 Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote:
> The license information in these files is rather confusing. The text > declares LGPL first, but then says that contributions after 2012 are > licensed under the GPL instead. How should the average user who just > downloaded the release tarball know which part is now GPL and which > is LGPL? > > Looking at the text of the LGPL (see COPYING.LIB in the top directory), > the license clearly states how this should be done instead: > > "3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public > License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library. To do > this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so > that they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2, > instead of to this License." > > Thus let's clean up the confusing statements and use the proper GPL > text only. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> > --- > linux-user/s390x/target_cpu.h | 19 ++++++++----------- > target/s390x/cpu.c | 19 ++++++++----------- > target/s390x/cpu.h | 19 ++++++++----------- > target/s390x/kvm.c | 19 ++++++++----------- > 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) Thanks, applied.